Project 14361 Engineering Applications Lab Introductions TEAM MEMBERS

Project 14361: Engineering Applications Lab

Introductions TEAM MEMBERS Jennifer Leone Project Leader Larry Hoffman Electrical Engineer Angel Herrera Electrical Engineer Thomas Gomes Electrical Engineer Henry Almiron Mechanical Engineer Saleh Zeidan Mechanical Engineer Dirk Thur Mechanical Engineer

• • • Background Agenda • Open Items from Last Review • Problem Statement • Customer Requirements • Engineering Requirements Systems Design – CAD Drawings, BOM, Technical Risks • Rail Gun • Heat Transfer System • Savonius Wind Turbine • Helicopter Propeller Three Week Plan for MSDII

Open Items From Last Review Refine and develop risks for each Module Connect experimental and analytical analysis for each module Generate BOMs Design Modules, create CAD drawings and sketches Update Edge

• Problem Statement & Deliverables Current State • • Desired State • • Three to four modules used to provide a set of advanced investigative scenarios that will be simulated by theoretical and/or computational methods. Project Goals • • • Students in the Mechanical Engineering department currently take a sequence of experimental courses, one of which is MECE – 301 Engineering Applications Lab. Create modules to instruct engineering students Expose students to unfamiliar engineering ideas Constraints • Stay within budget

Customers & Stakeholders Professor John Wellin Contact: jdweme@rit. edu Professor Ed Hanzlik Contact: echeee@rit. edu Engineering Professors and Faculty Engineering Students MSD Team

Customer Requirements • Requests 3 modules at minimum; 3 to 4 preferred • All modules must emphasize practical engineering experiences • Each module should be complex and interesting to the students • • • Modules should bridge applications areas, such as electromechanical and mechanical All module should have analysis challenges that are at or beyond student learning from core coursework All modules should be able to: • • Fully configured, utilized, and returned by student engineers Stand alone; contain everything they need without borrowing from other sources Have a high level of flexibility allowing for many engineering opportunities Be robust and safe

Engineering Requirements NEED # AFFINITY GROUP NAME IMPORTANCE 9 CN 1 9 CN 2 Key Engineering Principals CN 3 3 9 CN 4 9 CN 6 1 CN 7 3 CN 8 1 CN 9 Implementation of Labs 3 CN 10 CN 11 3 3 CN 12 3 CN 13 CUSTOMER OBJECIVE DESCRIPTION Modules may be of different technical challenges All modules must emphasize practical engineering experiences. MEASURE OF EFFECTIVENESS Bloom's Taxonomy of Learning Survey Professors regarding modules to ensure they have a practical application to students future careers If modules branch into multiple disciplines All modules should bridge application areas, such as electromechanical All modules should have analysis Form a test group to determine the challenges that are at or beyond student complexity of the modules learning from core course work. Customer request 3 modules at a n/a minimum; 4 or 5 are preferred. All modules should be interesting to the MSD team interest students. Can be run by 1 student but can be up to 3 - -Determine number of tasks and complexity 4 students required for each module -Personal experience from MSDI Team will be considered Modules can use commercially-off-the-shelf Research and define what can be built by equipment to enable maintenance and the MSDI Team verses what can be bought sustainability of module use over many out of the total number of parts required for semesters of student enjoyment. the module All modules should be stand alone; they Test modules in lab setting should contain everything they need without borrowing from other sources. All modules must be robust and safe. Conduct testing on equipment and modules All modules should able to be fully configured, utilized, and returned by student engineers. Design and build an experimental apparatus equipped with appropriate measurement tools Conduct testing on equipment and modules Define measurement tools required for each module- (1) hardware (ie- controller boards, motors. . . ) (2) Software (labview, matlab, transducer specific programs)

Functional Decomposition Teach Mechanical Engineering Students about Engineering Principles Utilizing Student Designed Modules Provide the Problem Introduce Core Concepts Distribute Lab Manual/Lab Abstract Show Videos/ Other Media Ask students to Make Modifications to Module Provide Variables to change in the Module for the Students Instruct Students to Establish a Theoretical Hypothesis Research the Effect of Variables to Module Have Students Hypothesize Results Provide Experimental Challenges Provide Analytical Challenges Advise Students to use the Appropri ate Analysis Tool Ensure module has proper complexity - upper class level knowledge and strong depth of analysis Take all measures to make sure module is presented in an interesting way to students Design in way so students can make various permutat ions to the module while still learning core concepts Ensure modules are designed in a way to minimize risk of injury Ensure results of experimental challenges are independent of student’s lab skills Hand out Test Procedures Inform Students to Construct Test Oversee Run of the Tests

Criteria For Modules Criteria Measure Include extension of core courses with some knowledge from unavailable classes Complexity Lab Skills Measurable 1 - Core course 2 - Core Course Plus 3 - Elective 4 - Beyond Capability, outside learning 1 - Results Dependent on Skill (Time consuming for inexperience) 2 - Skill has an noticeable effect on outcome of Students must be able to results set-up an experiment and 3 - No skill is needed to measuring instruments get results (set ups are preset) 4 - Skills have minimum affects on outcome of results (Time for set up is minimal) Include non-required Course Information along with core course information Variables Offer multiple configurations of module Depth of Analysis required for module Complies with safety regulations Severity Notes Level 4 More than acceptable, information can added 1 - One Variable 2 - 2 -3 variables 3 - 4 -5 variable Moved to 4 - combinational variables complexity Depth of analysis required duration Complies with safety regulation Safety Reduce Risk of Injury Grade 1 - Requires Supervision 2 - needs special knowledge of operation 3 - needs notification 4 - simple working since needed

Criteria For Modules Criteria Measure A variety of topics are incorporated within the module Interest Module interesting to MSD Team Measurable Use Google entry counts, video views, search amount Look at past application labs to see trends ranked by relativity Grade 1 - 1, 000 views not as interesting 2 - 50, 000 views interesting 3 - 1 million views very interesting 1 -Experience every day 2 -Experience is known but not common 3 - Related to regular day with minimal knowledge 4 - Related and captivating to student subject is relevant Notes Exposure to an unfamiliar idea or topic not completely covered in core ME classes Cost to make module must be reasonable/ Within Budget Constraints Budget Time Contains Reusable Parts Module can be completed with 3 -5 weeks Of the shelf Parts 1 -Needs all custom parts with a heavy price tag 2 - Need minimal custom parts 3 - Most parts are off the In house Manufactured shelf, some custom parts 4 - All parts are off the shelf, affordable/reasonable custom parts Time needs to be split into two, analytical and experimental. Experimental can't be ran for 4 -5 hours.

Rail Gun Module • Problem Statement: This module is a energy conversion system that uses electrical energy that is converted to mechanical energy to launch a projectile. Diagram of Rail Gun:

Rail Gun Background Rail Gun: An electrical system that uses electromagnetic fields projectile launcher based on similar principles. • Consist of a pair parallel conducting rails with an armature connects the two rails to complete the circuit and launch the projectile with the help of the armature. • Armature is the heart of the system- without it two parallel rails will not be able to produce the magnetic field that allows for something to be launched. According to the right hand rule, current is in the opposite direction along each rail, the net magnetic field between the rails are directed at a right angle as shown below:

Rail Gun Background The magnitude of the force vector can be determined from a form of the Biot-Savart a result Lorentz Force. All these can be found using the permeability constant µ(0): To determine magnetic flux: To determine Force on the armature on the left side of rail:

Rail Gun Background

Rail Gun Background Faraday’s Law: The equation above shows the electric power (iv) equations mechanical form as well and shows how they are relate to one another even so if they do not have the same Energy Density Expression: Magnetic Energy :

Rail Gun Rail Design 1 2 3 4 Part # Part 1 Rubber Stoppers 2 Copper Rails 3 Polycarbonate Top Layer 4 Polycarbonate Insulate

Rail Gun Block Diagram

Rail Gun Experimental Analysis 1. From the analysis done choose the rails, capacitor bank and armature 2. One the pieces are chosen, assemble pieces together 3. Adjust spacing between the rails to chose armature length 4. After all the pieces are put together begin charging capacitor bank. Measure voltage being supplied to capacitor bank 5. After charging complete, measure the voltage in the capacitor bank and current to determine actual energy to be provided to rails 6. Using a high speed camera, measure the speed of the projectile launched 7. Repeat test by firing gun to obtain multiple results to get the average speed that rail gun launches the projectile 8. From the average determine how efficient the gun is. Determine how much of the energy is actually transferred from the capacitor bank to the projectile

Student Scenario 1 Objective: Shoot a projectile at a speed of 10 m/s. Materials Provided: Different variations of rails Different capacitor banks Different armature lengths Analysis: Chosen rails specs L=300 mm, H=60 mm, W=4 mm Capacitors = 1500µF 450 V (Three in parallel)

Student Scenario 1 �

What Comparisons can be made from between the Analysis vs. Experiment? • Compare the velocity determined in the analytical model to the velocity measured in the experimental results. • Compare the current determined in the analytical model to the current measured in the experimental results. • Compare the capacitor bank capacity determined in the analytical model to the capacity determined through the experimental results. What is the Student Learning or Getting Out of this Lab Experience? • Students get to learn about technology and theories that are used in many modern objects around us, such as roller coasters and trains. • This module would be outside the norm of other labs that they may have preformed. • It would reinforce electrical engineering concepts that mechanical engineers have learned.

Rail Gun Risk Assessment ID Risk Item Cause Effect Likelihood Severity Importance Action of Management Owner 1 Injury to student Improper insulation Not enough insulation or damage to module 2 3 6 Layer polycarbonate on the side, middle and top of the armature Rail Gun Team 2 Defects in parts Change in resistance and varying student outcomes 1 3 3 Inspect all parts when they come in, send parts back that are defective Rail Gun Team 3 Corrosion in environment Rail Gun will not function 1 1 1 Make sure module is in an environment where this will not occur Rail Gun Team Analytical and Variations in Inconsistency Experimental analysis Student Outcomes with analysis do not match 2 3 6 Will be further developed in MSDII P 14361 Rail Gun Team 4 5 Electrocution of Student 6 Damage of Property Student touches capacitor, rails or Minor to severe where power source injury to student connects to capacitor bank Projectile hits something delicate Projectile hits and breaks object/s in lab 1 3 3 No unnecessary exposed wires, insulation on module and have students wear rubber gloves 1 3 3 Clear path for projectile prior to launching

Heat Transfer System • Problem Statement: This module uses convection and conduction to transfer heat from a high temperature object (CPU) through another object (heat sink). The heat sink is place on up of the object producing the heat and through the process of conduction the heat sink begins to warm up. A fan is placed right next to the heat sink to transfer thermal energy from the heat sink to the fluid medium (air).

Background: Heat Sinks General Case for Fin (Assuming steady state, constant properties, no heat generation, one-dimensional conduction, uniform cross-sectional area, and uniform flow rate): Performance Parameters:

Heat Transfer Heat Sink Options

Student Experience Plan Background Numerical Analysis Preliminary Design CFD Analysis Build Test Compare Results

Potential Problem Possible Problem: Maintaining an open air CPU at a constant temperature using a heat sink, and airflow from a fan. DESIGN SKETCHES:

Analysis Performed Objective: Design heat sink based off of given data, and create said heat sink in CAD. Numerical: Students will take the equations given, and create Simscape code to simulate heat build up in circuit. CFD: Import heat sink in CFD software, set boundary conditions, and run.

Building and Testing Student creates fins via purchasing them. Apply fin(s) to a heating surface, which is set to a specific heat generation that the students used in the original analysis. Test and compare results to analytical/numerical values.

Student Scenarios 1 Objective: Determine appropriate heat sink for a chosen heat generation and airflow Materials Provided: Surface heater with variable heat generation to simulate CPU components Fan with variable wind speed. Multiple types of heat sinks Temperature Sensors Case Analysis: Chosen CPU dissipation= 80 W, Power Supply dissipation= 75 W

Student Scenario 1 Create heat sink(s) with CAD. Create Simscape Numerical Analysis and COMSOL CFD Analysis, compare results. Simscape Heat generation Thermal resistance values Conduction coefficient Convection coefficient Wind speed

Student Scenario 1 In COMSOL Software: CAD model of the heat sink Heat generation Thermal resistance values Conduction coefficient Convection coefficient Wind speed Type of material Boundary conditions

Student Scenario 1 Student will put the heat sink(s) on actual heated surfaces. Run each sink for 10 min, during the run heat sensors will be placed within the heat sink and temperatures will be measured in intervals. Allow for a 10 min cooldown between tests (1 hour per team in total). Compare to analytical/numerical results.

Student Experience What Comparisons can be made from between the Analysis vs. Experiment? • Compare the temperature determined in the analytical model to the temperature measured in the experimental results. • Compare the heat transfer rate determined in the analytical model to the heat transfer rate measured in the experimental results. What is the Student Learning or Getting Out of this Lab Experience? • Students get to learn about technology and theories that are used in many modern objects around us. • This module would be outside the norm of other labs that they may have preformed. • It would reinforce heat transfer concepts that mechanical engineers have learned.

Heat Transfer Risk Assessment ID Risk Item Cause Effect Likelihood Severity Importance Action of Management Owner Will be further developed in MSDII P 14361 1 Variations in Analytical and Inconsistency Student Experimental analysis with analysis Outcomes do not match 2 Air Flow Failure of Not enough air flow module to work correctly 1 2 2 Will be further tested in MSDII, Heat Transfer purchasing of Team wind tunnel will eliminate problem 3 Variations in heat sinks Poor variety of heat sinks Inconsistency with analysis 1 2 2 Buy various heat Heat Transfer sinks that students Team will be able to test 4 Melting fins Fins become too hot Damage to module 1 1 1 Do not exceed the Heat Transfer melting point of Team aluminum Human Error Minor to severe injury to student 3 Include clear instructions on how to use heated surface P 14361 3 Always insure that the area around the heated surface is clear. P 14361 5 6 Injury Placing flammable Damage to materials or materials Property with a low melting point near heated surface Property Damage 2 1 1 3 3 3 6

Savonius Wind Turbine Background • Wind Turbine: a mechanical device that converts the rotational power of the wind into electrical power via a generator. • Savonius Turbine: Vertical-axis wind turbine (VAWT) with a number of airfoils attached to a rotating shaft

Wind Turbine Forces

Governing Equations

Wind Turbine Holder Design

Wind Turbine Blade Design 2/12/14

Wind Tunnel Design

Savonius Wind Turbine Potential Problem • Problem Statement: • The students will analyze the performance parameters cp and cq of a Savonius turbine using computational fluids analysis and experimentally.

Analysis The student will be given a savonious wind turbine, and recreate said turbine using CAD. CFD: Import CAD drawing in CFD software (COMSOL or FLUENT), set boundary conditions, and run.

Analysis Students will save the data, and import it into Matlab. Using this data they will create a Cq vs Re graph. From the Cq data and the CFD analysis the student can compute a Cp vs tip speed graph. 2/12/14

Building and Testing The Savonius wind turbines will be pre-built for the students. Place the wind turbine in a wind tunnel and run under the a variety of wind speeds. Either use tachometer and the output of the generator to measure torque and power or use a shaft encoder. Test and compare results to analytical/numerical values.

Student Scenarios 1 Objective: Determine the performance parameters of a given Savonius wind turbine. Materials Provided: Savonius wind turbine Wind Tunnel or fan with variable wind speed. Laser Photo Tachometer Generator

Student Scenario 1 Recreate wind turbine using CAD. Import CAD drawing in CFD software, set boundary conditions, and run. Import data into Matlab, and produce the performance parameter charts

Student Scenario 1 Student will place the turbine in the wind tunnel. Place the wind turbine in a wind tunnel, run under the a variety of wind speeds, and acquire performance parameters. Compare to analytical/numerical results.

Student Experience What Comparisons can be made from between the Analysis vs. Experiment? • Compare the performance parameters determined in the analytical model to the parameters measured in the experimental results. • What is the Student Learning or Getting Out of this Lab Experience? • Students get to learn about technology and theories that are used in many modern objects around us. • This module would be outside the norm of other labs that they may have preformed. Energy Conservation is getting big. VAWTs are concepts that are not really covered. Relates Electrical Engineering to Mechanical Engineering. Topics was deemed interesting by focus group.

Wind Turbine Risk Assessment ID Risk Item Cause Effect 1 Varations in Analytical and Inconsistency Student Experimental analysis with analysis Outcomes do not match 2 The analysis Not enough Variations of will be the combinations of blades same for each blades to change outcomes student 3 Structural Damage Too much stress from the wind Structural damage to module 4 Wind Turbine Copper Inconsistent winding of will not function Component copper correctly 5 Students design Unable to blades that can not be complete Prototyping rapid prototyped due to analysis of size or intricate design module Action of Management Owner 6 Will be further developed in MSDII P 14361 Likelihood Severity Importance 2 3 1 1 1 Students create various shapes of Wind Turbine blades that have Team been or can be rapid prototyped 1 3 3 Will be further tested Wind Turbine in MSDII Team 2 Warn students to wrap copper tightly, Wind Turbine best method will be Team further tested in MSDII 2 Layout specifications and requirements of Wind Turbine blades, further Team developed and explored in MSDII 1 1 2 2

Helicopter Propeller Background Helicopters: creates lift using airfoils like the ones used on an airplane’s wing. The faster the air flows through the wings (blades for helicopters), the more lift created.

Helicopter Propeller Background Lift: Lift can be determined from the pressure difference on top and the bottom of the blade. This pressure difference drives the blade to the lower pressure lifting the blade up and in return lifting the helicopter. Note: There are other components for stable flight which will not be tested.

Helicopter Propeller Setup

Helicopter Propeller Analysis For this analysis we will use the blade element analysis in hover and axial flight The blade element approach for the analysis of helicopter rotors has been well established in prior literature. This module will be mostly analysis through equations

Propeller Block Diagram Step Based on the diagram from the slide before, This is the resultant velocity at the blade element. The relative inflow angle at the blade element is for small angles Equation

Propeller Block Diagram Step The resultant incremental lift d. L and drag d. D per unit span on this blade element are: Where Cl and Cd are the lift and drag coefficients. The lift and drag act perpendicular and parallel to the resultant flow velocity. Also the quantity c is the local blade chord. Equation

Propeller Block Diagram Step Next the forces can be worked out to perpendicular and parallel to the rotor disk plane giving. Now the contributions to the thrust, torque, and power of the rotor are: Where Nb is the number of blades compromising the rotor, and Ωy = UT Now substituting in the previous equations: Equation

Propeller Block Diagram For helicopter rotors the following simplifying assumptions can be made: The out of plane velocity Up is much smaller than the in plane velocity UT, so that is approximately UT The induced angle Φ is small, so that. Also, sin(Φ)=Φ and cos(Φ)=1. The drag is at least one order of magnitude less than the lift, so that the contribution d. D*sin(Φ) is negligible. Step Using these simplifications we get: Equation

Student Experiences Student will use this module to test the affects of different propeller types, shapes and length for a desired thrust output. Variable that can change thrust output are angle of attack, motor speed, incoming air speed and weight of the system. This experiment will engage student’s interested in aviation.

Helicopter Propeller Risk Assessment ID Risk Item Cause Effect 1 Varations in Student Outcomes Analytical and Experimental analysis do not match Inconsistency with analysis Speed Module may fly away from Too much torque testing apparatus 3 Variablity Not enough The analysis combinations of will be the blades to change same for outcomes each student 4 Lifting Forces 2 Lift force induces stress Damage to propeller Action of Management Owner 6 Will be further developed in MSDII P 14361 1 Design and set up a mount to make sure this does not occur Propellor Team 1 Students create various shapes of blades that have been or can be rapid prototyped Propellor Team 3 Limit the RPM of the motor, find the max RPM, to be further tested in MSDII Propeller Team Likelihood Severity Importance 2 1 1 1 3

BOM

BOM Continued

Concepts Against Criteria Complexity Project Electrical Cooling System Helicopter Propeller Savonius Wind Turbine Rail Gun Include extension of core courses Offer multiple with some configurations knowledge of module from unavailable classes Safety Interest Depth of A variety of Analysis Complies Reduce topics are required with safety Risk of incorporated for regulations Injury within the module Budget Time Cost to Exposure to an make unfamiliar idea module Module can Module Contains or topic not must be be completed interesting to Reusable completely reasonable/ with 3 -5 MSD Team Parts covered in core Within weeks ME classes Budget Constraints x x x x x x x x x

Project Plan MSDII: WK 1 -3 WEEK ONE: Take inventory, make sure everything we have ordered has arrive Meet with Professor Wellin to regroup, talk about refining ideas, new ideas, and improvements to designs WEEK TWO: Implement design improvements Begin prototyping and building modules WEEK THREE: Setup a meeting with Professor Wellin to address module issues Continue building modules Continual improvement of Risk Assessments and Edge

Questions?